Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 8: To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he raised the privatisation of UK nuclear installations, including installations not being decommissioned, with Mr. Alan Johnson MP, UK Secretary of State, when he met him in October 2005. [36559/05]

Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 15: To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if the UK Secretary of State, Mr. Alan Johnson MP, indicated at their meeting on 19 October 2005 when the review of the THORP plant, following the serious incident in April 2005, will be completed. [36560/05]

Emmet Stagg (Kildare North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 107: To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government further to the assurances he received at his meeting with UK Secretary of State, Mr. Alan Johnson MP, on 19 October 2005, his views on whether the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland should be given the fullest information on the assessment of the threat of a terrorist attack at Sellafield and other UK nuclear installations; and the way in which he intends to progress same. [36556/05]

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 8, 15 and 107 together.

I met the Secretary of State for the Department of Trade and Industry, Mr. Alan Johnson, in London on 19 October. The primary focus of our meeting was a discussion on the incident at the THORP plant in Sellafield last April. I took the opportunity to widen the discussion and set out Ireland's views on other nuclear issues, including the possible commissioning of new nuclear power plants.

On the serious matter of the THORP leak, while the leak was contained and had no immediate implications for Ireland, I made clear to the Secretary of State the Government's grave concern over the occurrence and potential recurrence of such an incident. I underlined its particular concern that British Nuclear Fuels Limited's own report had found a culture of complacency at Sellafield which ultimately led to the accident. The Secretary of State confirmed to me that the UK Government is undertaking a review of the THORP plant with the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, which assumed responsibility for the Sellafield site in April 2005. While I welcomed this development, it is not yet clear when this review process will be completed.

I also sought assurances that the THORP plant will be closed by 2010, as scheduled based on current known contracts. I pressed the Secretary of State on the matter and am satisfied that assurances given in this matter are genuine and that that date will see the closure. I pressed him very firmly because I know Deputies are most anxious about the matter, particularly about the fact that the leak could delay the process. I am aware that the UK nuclear regulator, the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate, is investigating the THORP incident. Its report, when complete, should be published at the earliest opportunity.

I also raised the issue of security at Sellafield with the Secretary of State and we both noted the improved co-operation and information-sharing processes that the two Governments have put in place. These have come about as a result of the international legal actions which Ireland has pursued against the United Kingdom under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

While the UK Government has indicated it is under some constraint in regard to the provision of security information at Sellafield, within that context the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland has visited the plant and a report of that visit was published in April of this year. Further visits are planned. In addition, a liaison system with the Garda Síochána is also in place and those concerned visit Sellafield on a regular basis. The reports on these visits are confidential, by agreement of both Governments, but the UK Government has provided assurance that risk assessment is continuous and that the security arrangements at Sellafield are under continuous assessment and review.

I also took the opportunity to anticipate future UK energy policy considerations by informing the Secretary of State that if there are proposals to develop and commission new nuclear capacity, because of climate change or any other reason, Ireland would use every opportunity to put forward its view that, with such serious environmental and safety risks, the economic and environmental costs of nuclear power are unsustainable.

Earlier today, in a speech to the Confederation of British Industry, CBI, Prime Minister Blair announced a review of the United Kingdom's progress against the medium-term and long-term goals in the White Paper on Energy. This will specifically address the issue of new nuclear build in the UK. The intention following that review is to publish an energy policy statement in the summer of next year. I understand the UK Minister with responsibility for energy will undertake extensive public and stakeholder consultation in this regard. Ireland will engage fully and proactively in all stakeholder processes to oppose any such development and will take all measures necessary to protect the interests of its citizens.

I am not aware of any developing plans for privatisation in the nuclear industry in the United Kingdom. Obviously, if such plans emerged, Ireland would be opposed to them in principle. We would examine them closely and make our views known to the UK authorities.

Emmet Stagg (Kildare North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The very long-winded response of the Minister is a far cry from "Roche launches nuclear war on Blair". His spin doctor obviously got a different hand regarding the matter than the one he is presenting to us. A large section of the nuclear industry in Britain has been privatised. At a recent meeting of the committee, it emerged that while the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority that has been set up is not directly responsible for that sector, it was aware there were intentions to further privatise the industry. Its own operation for decommissioning is partly privatised. Does the Minister agree that privatisation is a very dangerous road to go down given the importance of safety in the industry? Does he not agree that there is a real danger that privatised organisations will cut corners to make profit? The nature and make-up of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority are such that it is in that category.

I do not believe the Minister answered Question No. 15 although he told us a lot about the accident. Is there any hope or chance that the THORP plant will not reopen? Did the Minister raise this with his UK counterpart when he talked to him? We certainly raised it with the decommissioning agency but it was not its business. In fairness to the ambassador, he assisted somewhat but was not able to give a definitive reply, as ambassadors are wont to do. Will the Minister state what he found out about the plant starting up again? In this regard, I am not referring to the 2010 date.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I share Deputy Stagg's view exactly on privatisation in this industry. Given the litany of extraordinary behaviour, particularly in BNFL, over the years, we share a common concern on this issue. With regard to whether THORP will start up again, and it still has not yet re-started, my primary concern was that there would not be an extension beyond 2010 of either the contracts or THORP. I wanted to get an assurance that there would not be an excuse to go beyond 2010 and, second, I wanted to secure an assurance that there would be no new contracts. I pressed the Secretary of State time and again on the matter and I believe the assurances given by him were genuine. He reiterated the point a number of times. We did not discuss when it might re-open. My focus was on ensuring that it closes in 2010.

Emmet Stagg (Kildare North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In a reply to my parliamentary question on 25 October, the Minister said that the Secretary of State had confirmed to him that the UK Government is undertaking a new review of the THORP plant with the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, which assumed responsibility for the Sellafield site and operations in April 2005, following this year's serious incident. Is that review completed? Has the Minister been informed when it might be completed?

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have not been informed of what stage the review has reached. At that time the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority was in its relatively early days. The issue I focused on was the closure date. I did not want any excuse to arise from the protracted period of its closure to be used to extend it beyond 2010.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The picture has changed since that meeting. The British Government now intends to build ten new nuclear power stations. Those stations will generate a significant amount of waste and there is only one place to reprocess it, which is Sellafield. Does the Minister not think there is greater urgency about this now? I acknowledge the Minister's bona fides on this matter but does he not believe we should be far more assertive, given the new situation, in pointing out strongly to the British Government that we are deeply unhappy with its proposed new agenda? It must have serious implications for this country. Where will the waste go? The British will not export it; they will send it to Sellafield. Where will the new plants be located? Will they be located on the coast facing this country? That is what concerns us. We must make it crystal clear that we will not accept it.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree we will have to make it clear. It is important that this debate in the House is heard. There is unanimity in the House that this is playing with fire. We are aware of the dangers of nuclear power and this nation is committed to remaining non-nuclear. I will continue to make that point in our contacts. We will also use the stakeholder process to put down our marker. The Deputy asked if the stations are likely to be on the Sellafield site. I mentioned that in the course of my meeting and got the distinct impression that there would not be a rebuild on the Sellafield site.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The key issue is where the waste will go. It will go to Sellafield.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They are closing THORP down by 2010. That is precisely the point we were making about the date for the closure. Our big concern about THORP was to ensure that it would be closed down by 2010. We will continue to press that issue.

Emmet Stagg (Kildare North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is a very definite proposal. It is not just an energy review. The British Government's energy review will report next summer and will look in detail at the development of a new generation of nuclear power stations. That is quite specific. Those stations will create waste and risk for Ireland. There will be no gain for Ireland. Has the Minister dealt with this in any way before it is a fait accompli? Perfidious Albion will do its usual thing and say it is reviewing but the decision is already made. The Minister should take it that the decision has been made and should deal with it as a decision. Will the Minister go in person to the stakeholders' meeting and present Ireland's case? I did it previously and I believe it was effective. The Minister should do that.

We raised the question of what would happen to the waste with the decommissioning group that came to visit us. The group said it was examining the geological option. That is the underground dump option for nuclear waste, which we fought previously. It creates a problem that lasts an eternity. It cannot ever be decommissioned. That is what is being considered again because it is the simplest thing to do. I ask the Minister to raise this issue in particular. That option would create a bone of contention between our countries on a permanent basis.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I had not thought of the strategy of attending the meeting. It is a good point and I will bear it in mind when we get closer to it. Prime Minister Blair's speech was at lunchtime today. I do not disagree with the Deputy. There is a determination in some parts of the British Government to push ahead with this. However, I get the feeling that there is not the same determination in other parts of that Government.

Emmet Stagg (Kildare North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A new anti-nuke club.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is strange how people have changed on this issue in that country. There does not appear to be the unanimity there might be on it. One does not know what would happen if there was a change in management. Let us hope for the best but prepare for the worst. In fact, I will take up the Deputy's suggestion and examine the option of attending the stakeholder consultation process.